Local view for "http://purl.org/linkedpolitics/eu/plenary/2001-05-15-Speech-2-150"
| Predicate | Value (sorted: default) |
|---|---|
| rdf:type | |
| dcterms:Date | |
| dcterms:Is Part Of | |
| dcterms:Language | |
| lpv:document identification number |
"en.20010515.6.2-150"2
|
| lpv:hasSubsequent | |
| lpv:speaker | |
| lpv:spokenAs | |
| lpv:translated text |
"Mr President, I have to say, the liberal group did wrestle with this topic to some degree, and has problems with the Commission proposal. The question is, how motherly should the European Union be in the quest to protect itself from its subjects? Indeed, we can see major differences compared to the control of tobacco. Tobacco is always harmful, whereas alcohol is not, most of the time. The addictive aspects are completely different. Tobacco is immediately addictive, alcohol is not. Also, the seriousness of the tobacco issue is of a completely different order from that of alcohol. Alcohol does create problems, and sometimes they can be harrowing. Just think of the road victims caused by alcohol abuse, which Mrs Malliori mentioned a moment ago, or the role of alcohol in domestic violence. However, the issues are first and foremost of a criminal nature and, as such, they belong with the national, not the European, legislator. This is also preferable for reasons of content. The cultural differences in this area are enormous, and a legislator who is closer to the citizen can therefore act more effectively, and, in the final analysis, effectiveness is what it is all about. In addition, in the proposals, the differences between justified alcohol consumption and alcohol abuse have been watered down, if you will excuse the pun. In that respect, we believe that the present proposals are to some extent missing the mark. We also vehemently object to the patronising overtones of many of the amendments, in particular. We identified much more with the rapporteur’s original report, on which we should like to congratulate her. To the Member States, I would like to say the following: be as strict as you like in terms of controlling alcohol abuse, and especially alcohol abuse among young people, but do not hide behind the European Union and behind what you are about to arrange amongst yourselves behind closed doors in the Health Council. We do recognise the fact that the issue of alcohol has a European, cross-border dimension, although it is not evident from these proposals. These predominantly focus on the ingredients of alcohol products. We believe that European legislation in the field of labelling should at least be considered or examined. This could then include the possibility of using warning labels, as is done in the United States, for example, at least as long as it can be proven that these warning labels serve a purpose. It could also incorporate the issue of advertising. Secondly, the proposals deal with taxes, excise, tariffs and such like. The differences in this field within the Union are enormous. We wonder about the internal market implications this has, as well as the health implications. That is why my group has tabled an amendment on both scores."@en1
|
Named graphs describing this resource:
The resource appears as object in 2 triples